Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J
Maruthamuthu – Appellant
Versus
S.Viswanathan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to plaint rejection on limitation and title grounds. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. limitation runs from refusal; plaint explains period adequately. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. article 54 mandates 3 years from refusal date. (Para 5) |
| 4. title irrelevant in specific performance suits. (Para 6) |
| 5. revision dismissed; pleas fail. (Para 7) |
O R D E R
An application for rejection of plaint in a suit for specific performance came to be dismissed. Challenging the same, the revision.
2. Two points are urged by Mr.Srinivasa Raghavan to assail the plaint. The first one being limitation and the second one being title. According to him, the oral agreement on the basis of which the suit has been presented was entered into on 02.01.2010 and the suit came to be filed on 10.01.2022. Hence, it is barred. His second plea is that the defendants 1 and 2 do not have title to the suit property for them to agree for sale with the plaintiff.
3. I have heard the submission of Mr.S.Srinivasa Raghavan. I have gone through the records.
4. A perusal of paragraph No.7 of the plaint discloses that the plea of the plaintiff is that the agreement was entered into on 02.01.2010 and demanding its enforcement, the plaintiff
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
